I have no intention of crowdfunding a rich man. Only the seriously deluded would do so.Originally Posted by scottish-guy
I have seen some of the rantings of the cybernats, some of whom blame Westminster, MI5 and Russia but not poor old Alex.
You bandy about percentages but here is one you don't like. 55% of those who voted said NO.
If you want me to accept that you don't take your views from the sources I've cited (and although some may be Murdoch owned, they're all English based and all Unionist) then I'd suggest it's incumbent on you to tell me which Independence supporting channels you do get your information from - and I await that information with great interest.
After that, you could compile a list of the alleged Anti and Pro Brexit print media (with circulation figures) and we'll see on which side the weight of numbers fell.
I don’t care whether you accept or not. Perhaps you missed my comment that I’m IN FAVOUR of independence for Scotland
Is Scottish Guy suggesting that the Scottish people do what Murdoch's media tell them to do? Because that suggests little in the way of independent thought.
Well, Frequent, if you don't care whether people accept what you say/ think then why bother posting your opinions at all?
The fact that you say you're in favour of Independence (and I know the punchline already, so don't bother), only goes to show how even-handed I am in questioning not only opponents but supporters too!
BTW you'd better answer whatever Arsenal has contributed. I'm assuming his post is for you? It surely can't be directed at me as, thanks to the Ignore feature I don't see his guff unless someone quotes it - an event which is almost as rare these days as anybody giving him a "like"
I guess everyone needs a hobby
A savage demolition of Salmand's conduct over this issue. And hardly from a right wing newspaper.
https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...bove-his-cause
To scotty's point, the British establishment has always been anti-Independence so would most likely make an appropriately anti-Salmonella report
The article itself is shot full of holes - the biggest of the lot being the suggestion that you should simply submit yourself to an investigation process which prevents you knowing the details of what you are accused of, or having any opportunity within the process to defend yourself.
The single (and wholly inadequate) saving grace of the Civil Service process which has been used to accuse AS is that it is (supposed to be) confidential - until of course a person or persons unknown decides to leak it to the gutter press. At which point, according to The Grauniad, you should just accept that too!
The only known facts of this matter is that by any definition the process has been inherently unfair, requires to be challenged, and that the leaking is absolutely malicious - the sole intention being to wreck not just Alex Salmond’s career but his reputation before or perhaps instead of establishing any guilt.
In such a situation, who would not fight? No criminal charges have yet been brought (any may never be) so the fight must focus on the process. The financial cost of doing so in the Court of Session in Scotland is estimated at a minimum of £50,000 and if you lose, you can at least double that. We assume that Alex Salmond is not short of a few bob of course but £100K is a considerable hit if things go the wrong way and the leaker gets their (her?) wish that you never work again.
Yessers and SNP supporters who wanted to help were suggesting a crowdfunder long before he launched one. £50K was targeted but £100K was raised in 3 days. Alex then closed it.
I see absolutely nothing wrong in how he has behaved over the past few days. Any accused person must be allowed a defence and the fact it costs £50K to exercise it is appalling.
Whether it is subsequently proved in a Court of law that he behaved badly within the substance of the allegations, will be another matter - although I suspect the media has now poisoned the prospect of any fair trial to the extent that one becomes impossible.
The article then goes on to suggest that Salmond had split the SNP and I’ve even seen elsewhere that “Civil War” has broken out. Such hyperbole is wishful thinking from the Unionist press bankrolled by the UK Govt (do you know the UK Govt via the BBC now funnels hard cash into the print media) - not to mention all the free advertising on BBC news and “papers” programmes. The reality is that there is neither any split nor any Civil War - it’s laughable.
However, should Salmond win this then, in my view, Sturgeon has some very serious questions to answer over why she signed off a wholly unfair Civil Service investigation process and inexplicably has continued to insist that confidentiality has been maintained when everybody can clearly see it has not.
Those who defend Salmand's conduct with regards to the due process show zero respect for it.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote